Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

 

CASE REF:    302/14

 

 

 

CLAIMANT:            Graham Davis       

 

 

RESPONDENT:      B&M Retail Limited

                                       

 

 

DECISION ON AN APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

 

The decision of the tribunal is that it revokes the decision of the tribunal under Rule 36(3) of the Industrial Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2005 as amended.

 

 

Constitution of Tribunal:

 

Employment Judge:         Employment Judge Crothers

 

Member:                          Mrs T Cregan

 

 

Appearances:

 

The claimant was represented by Miss McCrissican, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Donard King and Company Solicitors.

 

The respondent was represented by Mr I Steel of Cohen Cramer Solicitors.

 

1.               The majority decision of the tribunal issued on 18 August 2014 was that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and an order was made for his reinstatement in his existing role as a replenishment manager with the respondent on 15 September 2014. 

 

2.               The Employment Judge was the minority member.  One of the majority members resigned as a tribunal panel member shortly after the decision was issued.  The tribunal for the review hearing was therefore comprised of the Employment Judge (who had a casting vote) and one panel member. 

 

3.               In correspondence to the tribunal dated 1 September 2014, the respondent’s solicitors requested a review of the decision under Rule 34 of the Industrial Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2005 as amended.  The tribunal was satisfied that the review had been requested in the interests of justice under Rule 34(3)(e).

 

4.               The tribunal convened on 25 September 2014 to consider the review application.  However, on that date, Mr Steel was relying on the same grounds as pleaded in a Notice of Appeal to the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal.  He agreed to redraft the precise basis for the review before the tribunal.  Miss McCrissican, for her part, wished to have an opportunity of making written submissions.  The parties were made fully aware of the position of the Employment Judge, who had provided the minority decision, and of the panel member who did not have the benefit of her colleague.  In the circumstances the tribunal ordered submissions from both sides and the tribunal reconvened on 20 October 2014 to consider the review application.

 

5.               The submissions from both parties which are annexed to this decision, were carefully considered by the tribunal.  The promulgation of this decision was delayed at the request of both parties pending discussions with a view to resolving the matter.  The tribunal was notified, however, that a resolution had not proved possible. 

 

6.               In the circumstances in which it finds itself, the tribunal concludes that it is unable to either confirm of vary the original decision.  The only realistic option open to it is to revoke its decision and order the decision to be taken again before a newly constituted tribunal.  The parties were made aware that this was a potential outcome.  The tribunal is satisfied that such a rehearing is in accordance with its overriding objective and in the interests of justice.

 

 

 

 

 

Employment Judge:      

 

 

Date and place of hearing:  20 October 2014, Belfast.        

 

 

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: